“橘逾淮而北为枳”见于《周礼·考工记》,《淮南子·原道训》则有“橘树之江北则化而为橙”之语,故橘北移有枳、橙之异,后流为橘有二变说。本文从经、子语境考察枳、橙之异及橘化枳的问题,认为:二书中枳、橙差异的表述,出于百家异说的风气,本为同义相代;“橘逾淮而北为枳”后来成为伪常识,历代经学者的解释,皆本《周礼》“此地气然也”之说,而子部之书,对经书中的这一命题不仅怀疑,而且从植物分类的角度提出橘枳不同种、橘枳不能化的看法,此看法得到移植和嫁接实践的证实。比勘经、子语境中两种认识的差异,可见中国传统学术特点之一斑。 “Orange over Huai and north is trifoliate orange ” found in the “Zhou Gong Kaogongji”, “Huai Nan Zi Yuan Daoxun” there is “Orange Tree of the North and Orange” language, so Orange Moved with trifoliate orange, orange, after the flow of orange there are two variable. This article examines the differences between trifoliate orange and orange and citrus aurantium from the perspective of subculture. It is concluded that the expression of the difference between trifoliate orange and orange in the two books is derived from the common sense of “ Orange over Huai and north is trifoliate orange ”became pseudo-common sense, the ancient scholars by the interpretation of the past, are the“ Zhou Li ”“ This is also the gas is also ”said, and sub-book, on the book of the proposition Not only doubts, but also from the perspective of plant classification put forward the different types of orange and tangelo, orange and blue canonized view, this view was confirmed by transplantation and grafting practice. Compared with the differences between the two kinds of understanding in the survey and sub-linguistic context, we can see that the traditional Chinese academic features are distinct.